Are Bachmann & Graham Farish N Gauge Track the same ?
they both clip together - code 80 , but GF track is similar to Peco set track and Bachmann track has a Kato Unitrack look with grey plastic ballast .
Quote from: mr bachmann on December 23, 2015, 11:29:56 AM
they both clip together - code 80 , but GF track is similar to Peco set track and Bachmann track has a Kato Unitrack look with grey plastic ballast .
grey ??????????
could it be mistaken as black ?
Quote from: Only Me on December 23, 2015, 01:54:10 PM
no not really. Peco do concrete coloured track in code 55
I have managed to magnify the back and it says Hornby R607.
but if I google it, it will mot find Hornby N gauge ???
It is 100% N gauge.
Can you shine any light on the situation ?
Perhaps I have just got to bite the bullet, and get some
Perhaps I have just got to bite the bullet, and get some NEW Peco track ?
But which do I get ?
55 or 80 ??
I don't understand what the difference is ????
I am building an ordinary N gauge with DCC.
A Hornby R 607 shows as a 00 second radius double curve and Hornby to my knowledge never made N gauge track they used Arnold track so you've got me baffled.
Measure the width of the rails, if it isn't 9mm or there abouts it isn't N gauge.
John P
I too was under the understanding that Hornby didn't do N gauge.
Arnold track, hmmm ??????, but they do produce it with the Hornby name on !
Are most tracks compatible ? Or am I simply better off cutting my loses and starting again with Peco. 80 ! thanks 4 the info.
I think I have learnt, a not to expensive, lesson.
With a bit of trickery all N gauge track is compatible. The Hornby could refer to the arnold track, but this is "pre-weathered" a picture would help!
Merry Christmas
:Class91:
Phil
Quote from: simontk on December 23, 2015, 03:27:32 AM
Are Bachmann & Graham Farish N Gauge Track the same ?
No N-gauge track has been sold as a "Graham Farish" product for over 20 years! They did for a while produce their own track (bot it was not particularly robust especially the points), but since the mid/late 80s, the only track sold in GF packaging has been that included in their Train sets. In Poole days this was Peco Set-track. Since the Bachmann takeover, this has sometimes been Peco and sometimes a Bachmann US product...
Quote from: mr bachmann on December 23, 2015, 11:29:56 AM
they both clip together - code 80 , but GF track is similar to Peco set track and Bachmann track has a Kato Unitrack look with grey plastic ballast.
As per above, if you got the track in a Farish set it probably IS Peco. Bachmann (worldwide) do several different types of track, and I think there may be some on a kato-like base for the Asian market, but the type most commonly seen in the UK looks more like Peco, though IIRC the radius is different and the straights are a different length...
Quote from: simontk on December 23, 2015, 02:57:04 PM
I have managed to magnify the back and it says Hornby R607.
but if I google it, it will mot find Hornby N gauge ???
It is 100% N gauge.
Can you shine any light on the situation ?
If it says Hornby on it, it IS Hornby (and not Farish, Bachmann or even Peco!!) and as other say, that product code is NOT N-gauge. The Hornby-Arnold N gauge equivalent (2nd radius Double curve) should be #HN8007.
If you are certain it is N can you post a photo showing that branding with a ruler in shot to confirm please.
Quote from: simontk on December 23, 2015, 05:32:25 PMAre most tracks compatible ? Or am I simply better off cutting my loses and starting again with Peco. 80 ! thanks 4 the info.
The rail profile (cross section of the metal rail) of all code 80 track is within tolerance, but there are issues such as the depth of the sleepers and any plastic 'ballast base' that make mixing types inadvisable...
In your case, if you are wanting to stick with a set-track type, Peco code 80 is probably the way to go for reasons of simplicity and wide availability.
Hornby own Arnild and presumable bought the rights to the track with the company.
Presumably,y BGF needs a source of track and bought it from Hornby/Arnold.
There is a good range now:
http://www.newmodellersshop.co.uk/n_gauge_track.htm (http://www.newmodellersshop.co.uk/n_gauge_track.htm)
Quote from: Railwaygun on December 23, 2015, 07:12:48 PM
Hornby own Arnild and presumable bought the rights to the track with the company.
Indeed they did; - but I doubt they would stamp Hornby 00 part numbers on to the Arnold N-gauge track... That's a classic recipe for confusion... :hmmm:
Quote from: Railwaygun on December 23, 2015, 07:12:48 PM
Presumably,y BGF needs a source of track and bought it from Hornby/Arnold.
Possible but unlikely given they have a choice of 4 or 5 types available from within the Bachmann/Kader group of Companies and for the British Market, a long standing relationship with Peco...
Is it possible that it is old Hornby Minitrix track from the 70s?
Quote from: silly moo on December 23, 2015, 07:51:08 PM
Is it possible that it is old Hornby Minitrix track from the 70s?
Possible, but unlikely as the part number Simon quotes
is valid for current Hornby 00 track but
isn't correct for anything in the Hornby-Minitrix range...
[smg id=33360 type=preview align=center caption="finished"]
[smg id=33361 type=full align=center caption="conifer corner"]
The theme is 3 workshops off the turntable. When an engine is fixed it then goes and collects either wagons or coaches from 1 of the 3 sidings. It will then go and make sure everything is running correctly, round the main loop.
A bit elaborate I know, but I think it is better to make your layout as real as possible.
Which, with a limited space of 5 X 2.5, is difficult.
But as nothing is set in stone, I would like any ideas you may have ??????
Many thanks.
Simon.
Quote from: PLD on December 23, 2015, 08:04:13 PM
Possible but unlikely given they have a choice of 4 or 5 types available from within the Bachmann/Kader group of Companies and for the British Market, a long standing relationship with Peco...
the Kader track I have is
pink.
Regarding your layout plan, I'm certainly no track design fundi but if it were me I would make a few of the sidings a bit longer so you have more room for storage and shunting.
How about :-
[smg id=33451 type=preview align=center caption="latest pb w 2"]
Following the RH point off the lower track I'd suggest you use a LH point instead of the RH point as (a) it would get rid of that kink into the turntable and (b) give you slightly longer tracks ;)
[smg id=33456 type=preview align=center caption="straight"]
Like this ?
Quote from: simontk on December 27, 2015, 02:36:36 PM
[smg id=33456 type=preview align=center caption="straight"]
Like this ?
Got it in one, Simon :thumbsup:
newportnobby
I av pm u
www.sportsbiking.co.uk (http://www.sportsbiking.co.uk)